Jamshid Afshar wrote:
I just installed Cygwin. What kind of executable is zcat.exe? It doesn't
show up when I "dir c:\cygwin\bin\zc*" (only zcmp), but I see it's 19
bytes in Explorer. It works fine within bash, but I want UNIX utilities I
can use in the regular Windows Command Prompt.
$ ls -l zcat.
> Jamshid Afshar wrote:
> > I just installed Cygwin. What kind of executable is
> zcat.exe? It doesn't
> > show up when I "dir c:\cygwin\bin\zc*" (only zcmp), but I
> see it's 19
> > bytes in Explorer. It works fine within bash, but I want
> UNIX utilities I
> > can use in the regular Windows Co
At 03:22 PM 2/12/2004, Bakken, Luke you wrote:
>> Jamshid Afshar wrote:
>> > I just installed Cygwin. What kind of executable is
>> zcat.exe? It doesn't
>> > show up when I "dir c:\cygwin\bin\zc*" (only zcmp), but I
>> see it's 19
>> > bytes in Explorer. It works fine within bash, but I want
>>
>
> At 03:22 PM 2/12/2004, Bakken, Luke you wrote:
> >> Jamshid Afshar wrote:
> >> > I just installed Cygwin. What kind of executable is
> >> zcat.exe? It doesn't
> >> > show up when I "dir c:\cygwin\bin\zc*" (only zcmp), but I
> >> see it's 19
> >> > bytes in Explorer. It works fine within bash
On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 03:46:44PM -0600, Ross Boulet wrote:
>One other caveat I have found with using hard links (on an NTFS partition)
>involves upgrades. I changed the symlink for ksh.exe -> pdksh.exe to a hard
>link. When an new version of pdksh was installed, it resulted in two non
>linked f
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 03:46:44PM -0600, Ross Boulet wrote:
> >One other caveat I have found with using hard links (on an NTFS partition)
> >involves upgrades. I changed the symlink for ksh.exe -> pdksh.exe to a hard
> >link. When an new version
On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 05:05:30PM -0500, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 03:46:44PM -0600, Ross Boulet wrote:
>>>One other caveat I have found with using hard links (on an NTFS
>>>partition) involves upgrades. I changed the symlin
On Fri, 2004-02-13 at 08:59, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 03:46:44PM -0600, Ross Boulet wrote:
> >One other caveat I have found with using hard links (on an NTFS partition)
> >involves upgrades. I changed the symlink for ksh.exe -> pdksh.exe to a hard
> >link. When an new v
On Fri, 2004-02-13 at 09:05, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
> AFAIK, setup has always behaved this way. It first uninstalls the old
> versions of all packages being upgraded (that's how the old pdksh.exe got
> unlinked), and then installs the new versions (creating new files,
> essentially). It never
On Fri, Feb 13, 2004 at 09:14:57AM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
>On Fri, 2004-02-13 at 09:05, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>
>> AFAIK, setup has always behaved this way. It first uninstalls the old
>> versions of all packages being upgraded (that's how the old pdksh.exe got
>> unlinked), and then inst
12, 2004 5:15 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: What kind of executable is zcat? Crashes from cmd.exe
On Fri, 2004-02-13 at 09:05, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
> AFAIK, setup has always behaved this way. It first uninstalls the old
> versions of all packages being upgraded (that's
Larry Hall writes:
>Bakken, Luke writes:
>>$ ls -l zcat*
>>lrwxrwxrwx1 lukebUsers 19 Sep 21 16:29 zcat.exe ->
>>gzip.exe
>>$ rm zcat.exe
>>$ ln gzip.exe zcat.exe
Thanks, Luke, now I can use zcat from the Windows command line.
>Sure, that's another option but one that eats up disk
At 06:27 PM 2/13/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
>Larry Hall writes:
>>Bakken, Luke writes:
>>>$ ls -l zcat*
>>>lrwxrwxrwx1 lukebUsers 19 Sep 21 16:29 zcat.exe ->
>>>gzip.exe
>>>$ rm zcat.exe
>>>$ ln gzip.exe zcat.exe
>
>Thanks, Luke, now I can use zcat from the Windows command
13 matches
Mail list logo
